We support the proposal to use three different categories to define endocrine disrupting chemicals – known endocrine disrupter, suspected endocrine disrupter, potential endocrine disrupter. This approach allows the best use of available scientific evidence, and is line with the system already in use for carcinogens, mutagens and reproductive toxins.

CHEM Trust is calling on the Commission to properly investigate the potential benefits of a phase out of EDCs, particularly for human health, but also in relation to the stimulation of innovation to deliver a safer and more sustainable chemical industry. This benefits study should be an essential part of the Commission’s impact assessment.

“If you look at all the hormone-related cancers, they have all gone up in the last few decades,” she said.

“It cannot just be the genes, so the concern is that our exposure to any disruptive substances can be associated with cancer, low sperm count and other hormone-related diseases and disorders.

“The costs of those are enormous and if we have to look for alternative pesticides then I have every faith that the chemical companies can come up with them, if they are given a mandate to do so. This scare-mongering does nothing to help the debate.

“I don’t think any one substance is likely to be causing these effects, but if you think we are exposed to many plastics, pesticide residues and some from substances in the home, this consultation is about the EU trying to reduce that overall exposure.”

CHEM Trust’s work requires an in-depth and accurate analysis of the science and policy of chemicals, and the communication of this analysis to policymakers and other stakeholders.We now want to increase our capacity in this area, so we are recruiting a new Scientist to the team.Please share this job with anyone who you think might be interested!www.chemtrust.org/chemicals-policy-expert/...